If he calls the police they won't and can't do a damn thing unless they are RIGHT THERE, RIGHT THEN. He could easily be beaten black and blue multiple times over by the time the authorities arrive, at which point the authorities still can't help if the aggressors have already left.Wolverine18 said:
More likely they'll talk up their zero tolerance policies for weapons, the "what if everyone brought one" scenario, make it seem like his fault he was getting bullied and expell him anyway. You can already see the start of it in the article where they say they told him to "tone down" his apparel and that they wish he shouldn't have had to.Regnes said:
That's really NOT NECESSARY. I am capable of picking up KEY POINTS without the retarded and patronising EMPHASIS.Ultratwinkie said:
The police use and require a higher voltage because they generally require the target to be completely incapacitated as soon as possible. Civilian stun guns are built around the principle of shocking the target just enough to give them an opportunity to get the hell out of there.manic_depressive13 said:
The school is powerless to get rid of the kids until there's a near-catastrophic event. Even for a fight, they get 10 days home. You might not realize how incredibly hard it is to get someone expelled these days. School funding is tied to enrollment, so if you expel a kid, you're basically taking money away from the whole school. School boards won't stand for that, so they'll overrule a principal more often than not.kickyourass said:
So in this crowd of 6 people, he had a stun gun. What if they'd rushed him? Could he stun all six? Or is it more likely that at least one of the kids would have gotten hold of it, and the situation would have escalated? (I'll give you a hint, it's the second.) He's incredibly lucky they backed down (which only serves to prove that they were not determined to kill the kid).
What makes teachers any different? If we're not RIGHT THERE, RIGHT THEN, we're taking the word of one over the word of another. Except we don't have the Law on our side. We aren't allowed to detain, apprehend, threaten force, or do anything of the things that cops can do. We're lucky if we can get a suspension to stick, since school boards are notoriously political creatures always trying to appease the public (which is made up of the parents of bullies, too).Heronblade said:
You want us to bite? Give us some teeth. We can't "interfere" unless it's right under our noses. And we're so crazily understaffed that there's always somewhere unattended, even if it's the damn bathroom. You don't give cops water pistols and jump ropes, and then complain when they can't foil an armed robbery.
Because schools aren't law enforcement agencies, and teachers aren't cops. It's up to the parents to get the police involved, not the school. Our hands are pretty well tied.Loonyyy said:
Actually, the most likely scenario is exactly what happened.Dastardly said:
I don't blame the school, much less the teachers. The school board can't do a damn thing without getting yelled at by both the government and parents that haven't had kids affected by bullying, and the teachers... lets just say I'm well aware how shorthanded they are. I gripe fairly often about our educational system, but I'm well aware that the shortcomings have far more to do with excessive restrictions and lack of funding/resources rather than incompetence.Dastardly said:
We'll see. The kid just changed the game. He put weapons on the table, clear as day, and bullies can use them, too. See, next time, they'll bring more people. And, because they know he has a weapon, they're not going to give him warning or mercy.Heronblade said:
I cannot speak for everyone else here having checked the story before saying anything, but the article partly quoted in the OP is real enough.Grey Day for Elcia said:
Yeah, he should've just Shoryuken'd those bitches.Terminate421 said:
You can say it as many times as you wish, it still is not the only factor involved.Ultratwinkie said:
